Are eight billion people too many for planet earth? As we reach this milestone on November 15th, most experts say that the bigger problem is the overconsumption of resources by the wealthiest citizens.
“Eight billion people, that’s a significant milestone for humanity,” said UN Population Fund director Natalia Kanem, hailing an increase in life expectancy and fewer maternal and child deaths.
“Nevertheless, I realize that this moment may not be celebrated by everyone. Some express concern that our world is overpopulated. I am here to make it clear that the sheer number of lives is not a cause for fear.”
So are there too many of us for the earth to support?
Many experts say this is the wrong question. Instead of fears of overpopulation, we should focus on the overconsumption of the planet’s resources by the wealthiest among us.
“Too many for who, too many for what? If you ask me, am I too many? I don’t think so,” Joel Cohen of Rockefeller University’s Laboratory of Populations told AFP.
He said there are two sides to the question of how many people the earth can support: natural limits and human choices.
– ‘Stupid and Greedy’ –
Our choices result in humans consuming far more biological resources, such as forests and land, than the planet can regenerate each year.
For example, the overconsumption of fossil fuels leads to more carbon dioxide emissions, which are responsible for global warming.
We would need the biocapacity of 1.75 Earths to sustainably meet the needs of today’s population, according to the Global Footprint Network and WWF NGOs.
The latest UN climate report names population growth as one of the main drivers of the increase in greenhouse gases. However, it plays a smaller role than economic growth.
“We are stupid. We lacked foresight. we are greedy We do not use the information we have. Therein lie the choices and the problems,” said Cohen.
However, he dismisses the idea that humans are a bane on the planet and says humans should be given better choices.
“Our impact on the planet is determined far more by our behavior than our numbers,” said Jennifer Sciubba, a researcher at the Wilson Center, a think tank.
“It’s lazy and harmful to keep resorting to overpopulation,” she added, as it allows people in the wealthy nations that consume the most to blame the planet’s problems on the developing world, in where population growth is highest.
“Really, it’s us. Me and you, the air conditioning I enjoy, the pool I have outside and the meat I eat at night that does so much more harm.”
If everyone on the planet lived like an Indian citizen, we would only need the capacity of 0.8 Earths per year, according to the Global Footprint Network and WWF. If we all consumed like a resident of the United States, we would need five earths a year.
The United Nations estimates that by 2050 there will be 9.7 billion people on our planet.
– women’s rights –
One of the trickiest questions to ask when discussing population is fertility control. Even those who believe we must reduce the world’s population are relentless in protecting women’s rights.
Robin Maynard, executive director of the NGO Population Matters, says there must be population decline, but “only through positive, voluntary, rights-respecting means” and not through “deplorable examples” of population control.
The NGO Project Drawdown lists education and family planning among the top 100 solutions to stop global warming.
“A smaller population with sustainable consumption would reduce the need for energy, transportation, materials, food and natural systems.”
Vanessa Perez of the World Resources Institute agrees that “every human being born on the planet puts an additional burden on the planet.”
“It’s a very sensitive issue,” she said, adding that we should “dismiss this idea that the elite are picking up this narrative and saying we need to limit population growth in the South.”
She believes the most interesting debate isn’t about numbers, but about “distribution and equity.”
Cohen points out that even if we currently produce enough food for 8 billion people, there are still 800 million people who are “chronically malnourished.”
“The concept of ‘too many’ avoids the much harder problem, which is: Are we using what we know to make the people we have as healthy, productive, happy, peaceful, and prosperous as possible?”
